The Difference Between Men and Women

Finally, the answer to one of the most vexing questions of all time is here. What is the real difference between men and women?

To answer that, I need to illustrate with a micro short story that goes like this:

It’s a sultry afternoon in the City. The bar is air-conditioned cool, the lights are low and it being only 3:30 of a Friday afternoon, very few patrons are within. In fact there are only a half dozen or so taking up some 4 tables.

At the bar, all by herself, sits a young and very pretty woman sipping on a martini. She seems to be putting all of her energy in tasting and enjoying her drink. She smiles, absorbed in her own world.

The street door opens and a middle aged man in suit and tie, of average height, slighly balding and packing just a bit of a paunch, walks in, slows down and looks over the situation. Looking at the man I’d say he’s an insurance salesman, or a lawyer who has decided to quit work for the day and get an early start on the weekend. It’s Labour Day weekend after all and he probably wondered all day why he bothered to go to work at all.

Predictably he sees the short-skirted, long haired brunette at the bar and predictably he walks up to her and sits on the adjacent stool. Just as predictably, he says, “That martini looks done. Can I buy you a drink?”

The girl slowly turns her head to him and presents him with an enigmatic smile, taking plenty of time to reply, “Thank you, no. I buy my own drinks.”

Now before we get into what sort of comeback he’d have to that, let’s stop the action here and consider the drama in the making. What is happening here? An age-old situation, that’s what: man accosting woman. Woman responding.

This is where we realize the difference between men and women. The man approaches the woman and makes his overtures. He has no idea what the woman is thinking, or what she wants. Would it matter to him? Not in the least. What matters is what he wants, and what he is thinking and in a properly working universe, she’d be acquiescing. Doesn’t the length of her skirt prove it?

But we don’t live in a properly working universe. Men and women prove that. The youngish woman, though seemingly innocent, knows from the moment the man walks towards her, what he wants, and what he is thinking. And now it becomes a game in which, barring superior force and violence, she is the master player because of this difference: a woman knows what a man wants; a man has no idea what a woman wants so must assume, and conclude, that she wants what he wants. Apart from lacking any imagination, it’s really a dumb assumption; a worse conclusion.

And that, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, is why we have misogyny on this planet and why the mental gap between the sexes can never be closed.

Unfortunately men often think below the belt and such thoughts rule their actions and put them in impossible situations. Women have desires that can rule their actions as well but often these are centred on somebody they are already in a relationship with. Such is the power of sex and it must be that way to perpetuate the race. It is a force that cannot be ignored as our more transparent society makes very clear and each person has to find a way to come to terms with it in themselves and others. Friendship and character are the two important keys if we are struggling and lost in the world of desire and we must make allowances for those who make mistakes in this journey fraught with difficulties.
Technology is presenting us with new ways of approaching these problems and we now have the artificial doll for men and the vibrator for women. Who knows what new ways will transpire in the future. I remember the great hit ‘ I’m going to Buy a Paper Doll that I can call my own’ a beautiful song, but a song of possession and to attempt to posses another human being is dangerous.

Hi Kertsen, and quote: “…to attempt to posses another human being is dangerous.” Unfortunately all relationships based on other than complete equality in every sense of the word, becomes possession. The jealous lover: “You’re mine, and don’t you forget it.” “He’s mine, keep your hands off him!” Parents interact with their kids as their possessions. The “my” or “mine” is so common in relationships, in fact all relationships are possessive. Unless of course an individual (using myself as an example) chooses a path of detachment. Then the “mine” is not as often used to claim possession, though it is used (as for a vehicle, clothes, or tools) to denote personal property. But never for people. Not even those people who were once “my” children, nor their children. They’re people, that’s it. All that to say I totally agree with that quote from your comment. Possessiveness in regards to other people indicates insecurity; fear of being abandoned. Worst case scenario: psychopathy.

It takes time for us to learn how to treat others and guidance can result in possession especially with our own children , but we must let them fly their own way and there is much we cannot teach them because some lessons are only learnt by living. You cannot detach yourself from others ‘ no man is an island’ we are born into communities and we have to interact with each other . Even if we are in prison we have to be part of our circumstances along with all the others. When we open ourselves to others we share our strengths and weaknesses but that is good for both and makes us more human , more understanding , more loving , it expands our humanity. It’s what the artist does by writing painting and composition , it’s what the blogger does by sharing their thoughts on the internet. Personal property we often treasure but we all know the best property is that which we give away freely . ‘ It is better to give than to receive ‘ and in the end we must give our lives to nature having done what we can with them. Disappointment , suffering , anger, selfishness, foolishness , joy , stupidity have all played there part in mine but I believe in the Old saying ‘ better to have lived and loved than never to have lived at all’.

Quote: “I believe in the Old saying ‘ better to have lived and loved than never to have lived at all’.”
Well, that’s a truism all right! The way I heard it was, “Better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all.” (Tennyson) But… about detachment, a concept grossly misunderstood by mankind. Properly realized, detachment means I don’t have any “special” persons in my life, but all are, or none are. Always a “fist come, first served” basis and that takes away much confusion and guilt as to who gets what, when, and how much! To fully appreciate detachment one must be compassionate. To be fully compassionate, one must live in detachment from any special relationships. Hence, why true compassionate living is not a favourite choice of the Earthian species. So many attachments. Also, why it is so ridiculously short-lived: too many attachments dragging it down into anxiousness, fear, jealousy, penury and often despair. Too much? 🙂 Long ago I studied this quote and found it agreeable to me:
Mk. 3:32 A crowd was sitting around him, and they told him, “Your
mother and brothers are outside looking for you.”
Mk. 3:33 “Who are my mother and my brothers?” he asked.
Mk. 3:34 Then he looked at those seated in a circle around him and
said, “Here are my mother and my brothers!
Mk. 3:35 Whoever does God’s will is my brother and sister and
mother.”

Thanks for putting my quote to rights my brain is over crammed. My father who died in 1995 was not a believing Christian but an avid Bible student and kept a King James new testament on his beside table . My mother whyo was a believing Christian rarely read the Bible and her favourite Hymn was ‘All things bright and beautiful ‘. What the scripture implies is too much for me I am closer to my wife than any person malice or dead and of course I love my family before others. I sincerely hope my wife passes before me as it would avoid her suffering the pain of separation. Jesus Christ was an exceptional man with a message to deliver but it was an impossible one ; know one can love his neighbor associated himself though some do sacrifice their lives for others. We know the Gospel is unworkable and that is why the church invented the scapegoat story. The lamb of God making the Gospel possible for everyone. It’s a dangerous story because it encourages believers to stand on the blood of Jesus rather than attempt to follow the moral dictates of their own conscience.
Perhaps the most dangerous of Christian principles is to love your enemies it is absolute madness, the Old Testament an eye for an eye makes much more sense.

Thanks for your comment, Kertsen. I can see that on some things we are in diametrically opposite camps, and yet not that far apart. A question of understanding. I agree that using “love” as a mean, it is quite impossible to love one’s enemy, or enemies. Your choice: to revert back to the old tried and failed, eye for eye, tooth for tooth. Our civilization is based on that principle. There is another approach but that one requires serious work and commitment, and it is arrived at through compassion and of course detachment, since I can’t see how you can have one without the other. So, that’s where I’m at and it suits my temperament. Thanks again, Kertsen.

Yes our law and civilisation is based on an eye for an eye but it has become distorted by Christian forgiveness and that is why the death penalty has been abolished. It is why the worthless Charles Manson has been a burden on the state all his life. Christian forgiveness forgives everything , wipes the slate clean , prevents us from suffering from our acts , puts up with tyrants , distorts justice beyond recognition. Unlimited compassion demands no admission of guilt and it is guilt that makes us moral , guilt is our greatest friend it makes our characters and along with sorrow and suffering it defines humanity.

Thanks for your comment, Lily. Now, if we were to call it “learned misogyny” we still need to explain how, as a species, we developed such an evil as misogyny. Certainly one cannot be so crass as to claim it is a result of natural evolution! So, how did we get this “disease”? Back to programming. How did that come about? It was put in our DNA, as was racism and ethnocentrism. Who did it, when and why? Long story, but there are answers for those who keep an open mind about literally everything. It’s time we stopped blaming God, nature or ourselves for our obvious social dysfunctions and discover their source. Only then will we be empowered to deal with them by changing our own programming.

It’s the only way I can arrive at any kind of reason why such a horror would not only develop on a world, but why, even with all the education and awareness, it persists and in some cases, grows worse. The same with racism. My understanding is, these great horrors are/were programmed in our genes to be used to set us mindlessly against one another. To totally dis-empower us, so we would not evolve into compassion? Did they/do they (whomever “they” be) know that if we become compassionate we will no longer be programmable; no longer function as their slaves?

How true you are that ‘education’ doesn’t seem to increase compassion or lessen evil, unfortunately, only sophisticates the ‘horror’ in its intensity and magnitude. Yes, evil does appear programmed in genes (and compassion not ‘learned’ 🙂 ), but I can’t help thinking compassion must also be a code if evil is. More refined in some folk than in others, while skipping some all together just like evil, which is more potent. Rightfully so, we could do more, with compassion ‘people empowerment’ ‘no wars’ and everything else that is Good.

Thank you for commenting Lily. When I was young, not so “educated” system-wise but quite well read and up-to-date on current events (we didn’t have TV and radio was strictly monitored in our Catholic home, so not much use there), I would go into bouts of massive depression when I “surveyed” the future of that world I had found myself in. It was horrible, living under constant threat of nuclear Armageddon, and of course chemical warfare. We lived not so far from the DEW line, so that added to the stress: we thought if the Soviets launched they would target the DEW line for sure to prevent any “early warning” of incomings! There were also famines everywhere, and war, war, between India and Pakistan; from Korea to Vietnam, the Cypriot conflict and Africa was a powderkeg. Things have speeded up and intensified due to technology and rapid population growth but it’s easy to see how nothing essential changes. So I’m thinking, why not throw something as yet untried and untested in the mix? I don’t do depression, too depressing and wasteful of life energy, plus having nothing to lose but time I’m going to give some “revolutionary” ideas a spin on this blog. No doubt I will upset some applecarts and butcher a few sacred cows along the way but applecarts and sacred cows are a dime a dozen in any case and don’t do much good. The apples rot and the cows, well, they do what cows do: drop cow patties! So, being 71 now, with 60 of those years aware and observing (I was an annoying precocious thing) and my daddy enjoyed taking me to “important meetings” of the town and watch me pipe up and give the big men a run for their money on many occasions. Yeah, eventually I was barred from the meetings, and what does that say? All my life people have done their utmost to “bar” me from “meetings”, i.e., from expressing not just unpopular viewpoints, but viewpoints right from another world. Very religious people particularly, and today “scientists” wearing their mandatory “I believe in Evolution” admissions’ tag, don’t want their theologies and pet theories shown up for the balderdash so much of them are. Since neither theologians nor theoretical scientist are about to change their religion, I’m the one that has to be in error.
I like that actually. I like not being “in” and not fitting in because it’s only then that we begin to glimpse at possibilities never dreamed of, or if they have been dreamed of by others, never admitted to. The Status Quo, that great and terrible oppressive voice of Earth is very convincing. Maybe we should ask those millions of women healers who were tortured and burned alive at the stake by the so holy Church. Now we have “science” doing exactly the same except it doesn’t even bother with a trial, just sends the drones to drop the cluster bombs and dirty nukes. It’s a Wonderful World!
Anyway, I’m just going to keep pushing. If people read, they read. If they do not, they do not. If they feel a need to disagree strongly… so be it! 🙂

With all that I didn’t touch on compassion as a coding in our DNA, for example. That’s an interesting way to proceed. I would understand that we come off the assembly bench fully coded and part of that coding is an area allocated to free will, thus making us, if not altogether human, at least pseudo humans (real humans do not kill, have no need for such pathetic retrograde activities). Once we access our free will, it should be obvious that such is the way to a higher life, to full-fledged humanity. Interestingly however, free will without self empowerment is a chimera. If I do not “own” every aspect of myself, thoughts, words and interactions with the world I am not operating from free will. It’s like all these other wonderful things: democracy, freedom, love – wonderful words that generate a lot of emotions but what do they represent when all is said and done? The idea is to become “independent” – self empowered and operating from free will. Then delve into the coding that we received and move it out of coding into, let’s say, part of the operating system. Compassion would then become a force rather than a code. Anything that is brought out of coding and into the operating system can no longer be canceled. Someone/something may hack the file and delete the code, as you would delete an app file in a folder but that will not affect the program. We’re off and running then. And presumably the same can be done with the coding for evil behaviour. Do I “know” what I’m talking about? I look at the above and think, yeah, at least to a 70-80 percentile accurate description.

Quote: “I wonder if you realise how much like the Genesis story that all sounds? It’s another way of describing the concept of “original sin” – which, in case you hadn’t noticed, I don’t believe in either.” It seems obvious that the concept of original sin is a controlling mechanism wielded by the church to force people into the whole “believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you shall be saved” thing. What I hint at came long before the church or original sin. We can believe we are the result of natural evolution, or selection, that was never interfered with. We can believe we were created by “the Lord God” in the garden of Eden. Or we can take the leap that soon will no longer be denied and realize how our development was indeed interfered with, not by God, or gods, but by “aliens” which the Sumerians called the Anunnaki. The genus Homo Sapiens, is a cloned race, or better put perhaps, “races” that appeared with differing skin tones all over the planet and that carried similar myths: that of the creator gods. They were also accompanied by amazing artifacts in stone that even with today’s sophisticated technology, can not be duplicated. So, yes, there is much solid evidence that “man” is a product, not a naturally evolved creature. Once that is understood, perhaps the less than great traits of the “product” can be reasoned and dealt with.

Well… Sort of! We all tend to typecast each other based on what we see on TV or in the media. We learn early ‘the rules of engagement,’ and we make assumptions and huge leaps of judgement based on time, place and behaviour. We see pretty predictable in many ways. I think it is a little unfair to do this… We lay blame before a crime has even been committed!

Our live are circumscribed by predictable events and we have the mental wherewithal to deal with them. If I know the rainy season is coming and my roof is in bad shape, I get it replaced. Bills are predictable, and it’s a good idea to not spend all the money so the bills can be paid. Certain behaviours from certain people are predictable and if such are unacceptable we take precautions. Being prepared for the predictable isn’t judging someone before a crime is committed, it’s just common sense. If, however, we choose to play the game, there are countless ways to ignore common sense: lotteries, casinos, extreme sports, eating unhealthily, doing drugs, drinking, unprotected sex or making ourselves vulnerable to predators for kicks. My little story illustrates a common enough exchange. My own experience says that yes, a woman can usually tell why a complete stranger is offering her a drink. She knows what he wants: her. For sex. She also knows he’s not interested in her as a human being – he knows nothing about her and it doesn’t matter to him where she’s at. And that’s predictable. Of course, if she allows the situation to develop and there is a relationship it could grow into a love thing, then marriage. Along the way he may start to take an interest in her as a living being with a life of her own… that is, may, but she may have to force the issue!

Thank you for your comment, Clarissa. I know the topic is fraught with emotions but in light of all the brouhaha taking place on sexual harassment, the topic needs exploring as if we were serious in discovering why sexual harassment even occurs.

It’s nature! Most species exhibit similar behaviour. And the principle function of religion is to control it. In the absence of religion in the modern world, both men and women are confused by the conflict between their instincts and their intelligence. As an optimist, I think most are discovering ways through that confusion.

Thanks for the comment, Frank. And perhaps people are learning to deal with their sexual problems, but even in the hard religious days sexual “misconduct” was rampant, if we are to give history any credence. According to the Bible, prostitution, though severely frowned upon by priests and prophets, thrived in Israel and Judah under the kings. The “great” king David himself had his best friend killed to escape judgment after having raped his wife Bathsheba and getting her pregnant. Personally, and as I’ve explained in replies to other comments, I don’t see it as just nature. Nature would have a time, a season, and then the “passion” would die off. Seems to me that if the sex was intended purely for procreation (nature) there would be an appropriate age for it and then it would no longer be a felt need – no desire. If it was natural, why so many rules and taboos on sexuality and nudity? If it was natural, why are women getting such a rotten deal from civilization on account of their sex? Something just doesn’t add up and that something stinks.

As entertaining as this was to read, the stereotypes of our genders are beginning to fall apart. Do we as men crave females to an outlandish extent to the point we make fools of ourselves? a lot, yes. But isn’t it wrong for a woman to do so? and by all means, I see nothing wrong with it. The story is great, but it invokes a battle of power. This is a case by case basis and cannot be applied to all peoples of men and women. This woman is confident, not all are. Just like men, not all are. Besides, this woman gained nothing in this situation and if stereotype is to follow this situation, she’ll remain single forever.

I write similar topics on my own blog, feel free to read if you like. Despite my stance on your post, I actually do like it. It’s satirical, and that in itself is my specialty.

Hey, thanks for that pointed comment. Yes, it was satirical… and tongue-in-cheek. A bit of a come back to all the recent “don’t touch” alleged, and some certainly predatory, sexual depredations in high places. I remember a teacher friend of mine, male as you will see, who recounted being hauled into a meeting where the whole sexual interaction was discussed. The speaker, female of course, chose to focus on sexual harassment of males on females. One of the male of course teachers responded by how unfair it was that most, of not all, sexual harassment was directed at females. I wish it was the other way around he commented… you wouldn’t hear me complain. He probably got into some political correctness trouble over that, but wasn’t he making some sort of valid point? What if it was just natural sexual exchange, no power play, no force, no violence of any kind, just choice? What if a very young woman chose to spend time with an older man, or vice-versa? It all comes down to things the status quo will not easily allow individuals to have full control over: self empowerment and choice. Or… choice through self empowerment. Sex/gender has always been a powerful way to control the species and twist it beyond recognition. Misogyny isn’t a natural thing,it’s part of the greater agenda of mind control. And so is political correctness. And so is religion. And so… on!

“I wish it was the other way around he commented… you wouldn’t hear me complain.” That right there is what sets the genders aside in terms of equality. And by all means, this is why guys in all honesty wouldn’t face sexual harassment (from a woman) He is right. And yes, he does make a valid point. So to do you.

I look forward to reading more from you, you appear to be a very interactive blogger. One I find interesting for discussion.

Well, it’s cultural, different cultures have a different approach to engage the other sex, unfortunately it seems, our current globalization trend it’s exporting our Western mindset almost everywhere, and it’s the jerk’s way!
Just the setting a bar, and drinking, you go there to enjoy yourself and expect not to be approach by some jerk?
What is a bar?
Or should I say, what we expect to find in a bar?
What do they sell in a bar, besides alcohol?
A lifestyle?
An opportunity to meet people?
Or to pick women?
It’s not a bar a sort of a trap business, where they sell you drinks at a high price, and a setting, either to get drunk, or to entice people’s fantasy?
I am not a female, neither like bars, and I wouldn’t go to a bar to try to meet women, period!
However there’s a lot to talk about the different mindsets between the sexes, subject. 🙂

I don’t mind bars (or pubs as they are called here in Canada) most of the time. There are lots of reasons to go sit in a darkened place, to think, maybe to read while sipping a favourite drink. I like it when they are almost empty – got used to it having to spend time in ’em before and after hours, working. It’s like you can feel the latent energies in there; you can feel dreams and hopes; despair and ignorance; fun and frivolity; it’s in the atmosphere even more when the physical, noise-making bodies are gone. Great way to interact with people in general when you’re a not-terribly-social person but still want to get to know people by the energies they put out. As for using that avenue to meet strangers? Probably not recommended unless you are truly psychic. If not, and you are accosted, you would be really dumb to not know the motive behind the move. Lots of men are terribly lonely, and terribly needy. Most never outgrow that and having a “home” partner isn’t the answer either. As I’m annoyingly fond of quoting: no one woman can ever satisfy a man’s sexual needs, hence why men basically never stop looking, wondering, wandering and hoping; why they are particularly attracted to younger females. It’s how they are programmed – not nature, not lust, not evil, not “fear of aging, or death,” just pure and simple programming. That programming is a very difficult thing to break and honestly most men would choose not to break it if they were aware of it, and of its antidote. They don’t see it as a problem because the chase, however hopeless, still gets their gonads working and that feels good. As I said, programming, that’s all. Any woman past the bopper stage should know that.

Well, my question will be; if it’s not natural, then it’s not biologic, or genetic?
You said:
“It’s how they are programmed – not nature, not lust, not evil, not “fear of aging, or death,” just pure and simple programming.”

I knew that would raise eyebrows! I meant what I wrote: not NATURE. Here’s how it goes. Mankind is a GMO creature. Cloned from alien and earth pre-Homo Sapiens proto humans DNA. To repeat: man is not a naturally evolved creature. The (particularly) male sexual need is a flaw but man’s “creators” were equally sexually driven according to Sumerian antideluvian records. There is also a biblical reference to “the sons of God” being taken by the beautiful Earthian female clones and raping them (presumably against the rules?) The resultant progeny were called the Nephilim and apparently they were a great curse, and bane to the creators. To properly understand both our physical make up and our mental abilities, we would need to know the truth about how we came to be what we are today. Not created from dirt, as claimed by creationists, nor naturally evolved as per Darwinist theory, but cloned and programmed to serve the makers. Thus we find ourselves somewhere in between worlds and until we wake up and take control of our lives as self empowered individuals, stuck in a no man’s land with irresolvable social problems which may well spell the end our the species and possibly its planet. Back to the sex thing, the makers instituted marriage in one of their many (and vain) efforts to control the species sexual drive and reproduction. I hope that helps. The rest can be discovered through research, research and more research… and an open mind.

Why a paunchy middle-aged guy would think he is every girl’s dream is one question. Then you have the ‘handsome’ types who have convinced themselves every girl dreams of them. And then you have the loud-mouthed aggressive idiot.
-There are types.
It’s a problem.
Though in my youth having been approached by seedy middle-aged men I can sympathise.

No one’s ever safe from the predator. Sexual predators are always hungry and always on the prowl for a “victim” and the story is so old and predictable the intended victims should be aware of this at all times. Still for many it comes as a surprise. For others, playing the victim may lead to better pay, or a promotion – also the old game that has much in common with prostitution. I’ve known a lot of men who think of themselves as God’s gift to women, who only think with their little head when in presence of a woman and are quite willing to demonstrate. Some men (many, actually) never outgrow this “need” to be sexually adulated. It’s a thing attached to civilization it seems. It was much less (or non-existent) in societies living before, or away from, civilization. When we look at irresolvable issues, we should always first and foremost consider our civilization and ask the big question: is this because we live in a reality we call civilized? Would we be doing this, or acting like this, if we weren’t “civilized?” Sexual predation, gun culture, resource wars, overpopulation: we can readily place these evils and many others at the feet of our great goddess, civilization. If our greatest social evils are caused by civilization, is it unthinkable that we could find a working alternative to our greatest Achilles’ heel, our civilization?

As for the sexual drive, we could go back and back into primal urges etc, etc. But that would only give ammo for the apologists and their ‘boys will be boys’ excuse.
My own answer is to bring in the fear factor and make sure the worst have their urges ended as solution and an example to others.
The old crude joke goes:
‘Two half bricks’
‘Does it hurt?’
‘Only if you catch your thumbs between them’

There was a Woman’s Self Defence group in London who used to teach woman this tactic on a bus. Grab the creep’s hand, raise it high and shout ‘Who’s Dirty Little Hand is This?’
It was a good idea, but I’m tipping my hat to the girl with the fast slap.

Well, raised eyebrows, and you can add a chuckle, here is this woman who rejects Christian Religion, and Love, but have recourse to obscure Bible passages to come with what it’s now a new take, in an old story, that add extraterrestrials, and cloning into the game, when before where just plainly named the Demiurgos, Eons, and Archons, what the apostle Paul famous line said in Eph. 6:12:
“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the world rulers of this darkness, against spiritual wickedness in high places.”

Hi! I shall re-read that post; it’s been awhile. How to present “new” ideas? We make quantum leaps through space and time, weaving a new fabric. I call this “leap” eclecticism. “Something old, something new, something borrowed, something blue and a sixpence in your shoe” (what a bride holds on her wedding day).

Hum… Show me the money dear, point me where to read your ideas on the subject, or how you come to your conclusions. I am not yet a mind reader.
Or more than a Quantum leap, that by the way still baffle many scientist today, dear Sha’ Tara, I may think more like a matter of having faith, on a rambling, hodge-podge of ideas, concocted freely to suit particular proclivities, of the moment, as it is very common in America to do, by many people, cults, groups, and individuals, who by the way are legions.
I thought you Canadians are a different sort on that respect, but I may be wrong.
So please, enlighten me. 🙂

Hello TBH… Let’s start with this: the very last thing I would desire to do is to enlighten anyone. I’m a “provider.” You could say that my stories are tidbits from a mind’s second-hand store. Pick and choose, try it on, take your time to look at yourself in the mirror of experience. Judge the results. Use some of it to insert between what you already know, or think you know — see if it helps to understand it, or if it blows it all away.

I offer chaos and confusion; the reworking of the teachings of masters, changing of paradigms and the butchering of all sacred cows. Here nothing is sacred except life itself. When it comes to the stories I remember; those I seem to make up; what I “channel” as some call it; I believe “in” none of it because the moment a belief establishes itself, that’s the end of evolution or mind expansion. I don’t tell lies, I just know that there is no such thing as “the truth” and that’s a great freeing concept in itself.

Beliefs are the bane of mankind. We need to constantly chase away our beliefs, particularly those attached to tradition and history. More, we need to kill them. What’s that line… If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him…” What’s a Buddha, a God, a Jesus, a Master? Belief systems. None of them have anything, or can add anything of value to what we already have. Perhaps they may help open a door into our (sub)conscious by driving out a fear, or tweaking curiosity, so we realize we have stuff we didn’t know we had, and we may begin sorting through some of it. As we start digging through, we should expect to find a mess, not neatly stored concepts in neat pigeonholes. You’d be amazed what’s in there.

Masters and teachers… they like to use bits of their own storage, the ones they’ve sorted through and stocked neatly on readily accessible shelves and feed these to gullible or hungry types; make followers, believers, disciples. I’ve played that game, been on both sides, mostly the receiving end. Then I realized I already had all that stuff and here I was wasting time listening, reading, trying to make “his” into “mine” and paying money to buy what I already possessed, what I was born with. OK, so my terminology was different, but it was always the same concepts. And they did not work. It’s important to note that: they did not work.

Here’s the difference between drawing from your own stock instead of that of some master or teacher: yours is all connected to you and there is continuity through your awakening memories as you sort through and remember “stuff” whereas if you rely on teachers, you can only go as far as what they have told you, or written down for you. You’re eating and drinking from someone else’s pantry, not one you stocked yourself and since they are no longer stocking it, the food has become stale. The end result is, no real change. Just look at your world and see how little all the “great” teachings have accomplished. Look at organized religions, the great political movements, the great struggles for justice and equality. Then look at the current results; where civilization is heading; what man is doing to the planet. Does it make any sense why it is so, now?

That’s why the Teachers (those who worked with me) insisted I tell my own stories, and worked from my remembrances, both of past and future (there is no such thing as “the present” they said, and that is a truism). But how does one know? It’s simple: there are no such things as facts. There is no such a thing as the truth. Because nothing is “real” in the usual sense, everything becomes real. Everything exists the moment it is thought of, spoken, acted upon. Good, bad, indifferent, it’s all real. Science fiction which I use liberally as glue between history and projections into man’s future, is just as real as a sun rise. I can quote Bugs Bunny alongside of Gandhi and it will make sense — to those with an open mind.

I think, therefore I am, and I change as my thinking changes. I speak therefore I am, and I change as my speech does. I tell stories therefore I am and I change as my stories change. I am self-aware therefore I change as my mind changes.

They say that the one constant in the universe is change. Another truism. Enlightenment is change. The moment we settle for this or that teaching, or belief, we are no longer being enlightened, we are being instructed, programmed and pigeonholed. We are being systematically dis-empowered. The very last thing I’d want to see is some poor person being thus dis-empowered because she is hanging on to the stuff I say, or write. That nice second hand jacket from the second hand store isn’t a wardrobe. It’s just a second hand jacket, perhaps to wear in the garden, perhaps to pass on to someone who needs a jacket on a cool day. It’s not something you wear at a formal dinner, as an evening gown or to bed. It’s all temp, useful for when the situation demands it, all expendable!

Well, thanks for your questions TBH. Hopefully your are now less enlightened than you were before you read this. You know, I should probably blog this.
Take good care o’ you!

Dear Sha’ Tara, first let me say that I agree almost totally in your impassioned response, we are all made up of the same substance, but we arrive where we are by different ways.
What it work for someone, not necessary will work for someone else, diversity, and seeing things, from many, and different angles, it’s the rule, rather than the exception, all roads may take you to the same place, but the Path itself it’s different.
We may not see eye, to eye on a particular subject, but it doesn’t mean I cannot see, that you got there through a different route.
If you notice I like to add stories, or parables to what I say, since trying to explain mystical experience with words, it’s like trying to carry water with a sieve.
A favorite, and brief explanation of mine it’s the opening of John Gospel, when he talk about the word of God being the Light of Men, unlike the rest of the same Gospel, do not believe Jesus had exclusive rights to that Light, by the fact that the Light is an inalienable right of every being in existence.
Some just manifest the Light better than other ones, but fundamentally we all share and have it within ourselves.

And I could add a lot more, but given my inclination to long winded, pieces of rhetoric, I try to restrain myself, and be brief.

Sometimes you’re brilliant, and sometimes you’re so full of (poop) I swear we could give you an enema and bury what was left over in shoe box. I say that with all due respect. Women are far more complicated than men, that is true. Every woman in a short skirt isn’t a target no more than every woman in a long one is a librarian. Every tired old mainstream man isn’t looking to be a foolish stereotype.

A well and provocatively dressed woman accepts tired, long day at the convention guy’s offer of a drink, waits through the “what do you do” conversation, leans over to where he can feel her warm breath on his ear and says to him.
“Three words. Say them and I’ll do it. Five hundred dollars.” She squeezes his forearm, sits back on her stool and waits. Waits some more.
“Sweety, we don’t have all day. You have those three words for me?” She can see his brain working overtime, looking at her and running the word combinations.
He turns his drink in his hand, kills it, sets the glass on the bar.
“Three words?”
“Yes.”
He tightens his lips, thinks some more, pulls five Benji’s out of his wallet, hands them to her. He starts to say something, she shushes him.
“Whisper, Sweety. Right in my ear.”
He shrugs, leans over. “Paint. My. House.”

Three was all he got, like with the Genie in the lamp. You need to open the document I sent you to the chapter “The Trouble with Sisters” and meet a feminist with a new perspective. The first step to better men is demanding better men.

Thank you for your comment. Well, that’s the “million dollar” question, isn’t it. For my part, I am attempting to delve into our own distant past to discover what went wrong, because there is no doubt in my mind that “something” went seriously wrong somewhere, somewhen. Misogyny which is inextricable from men’s desperate need for sex, particularly from younger women, even girls and babies (!) is certainly not a result of natural evolution. If it was, we would observe the same thing in all other mammalian life forms. Racism is also a great and ineradicable evil, also not the result of natural evolution.

There is blatant, rampant evil at work here, but at this stage of our “development” I don’t see that “the people” are equipped to deal with their problem, mainly because their programming tells them it’s always someone else’s problem. Blame the women or fall back on “tradition” for crimes against women. Earthians are a badly developed and sexually immature species that needs at least one more huge test — the total collapse of this current global civilization — before a new mindset can grow from the chaos, destruction and massive death toll.

Sure, it could all be avoided if by some “miracle” everybody woke up tomorrow morning and realized they were all filled to the brim with compassion and empathy. That is the only thing I can imagine being powerful enough to stop mankind from hitting its looming societal brick wall at 150 km/hr and smashing itself and the car (civilization) and most who comment on that call it “Utopian thinking” which tells me most people do not want to take that step into a different mindset.

Meanwhile, win, lose or draw, those women who choose to fight back can only do so and hope for justice, depending on which society they live in. The president of the US is a misogynistic sexual predator and the state of Alabama is about to elect a known pedophile and sexual predator to the American senate. Both, to some degree, make claims to being Christian. The corruption, political and moral, runs deep and is endemic. In the USA at least, there can be no cure; no turning it around — it’s the Roman empire all over again. Not very cheery, is it.